Quote Originally Posted by OhhWatALoser View Post
Black pastels is co-dominant because the het and homo forms are different. If the homozygous Pin had issues, it would be different. To be dominant the trait has to be fully expressed in het and homo form. different homo = co-dom/inc. dom. black pastel it is not fully expressed, so it co-dom/inc. dom. Pin is fully expressed, so it is dominant.

Yes that what I'm saying with super pastels, I think other have explained this well enough for you.

Here the thing, I breed a pin x pin I have years of proving out before I even know ones homozygous. Pastel x pastel I know as soon as the clutch hatches, 3+ years down the road you finally prove out your homozygous pin, while the other guy has super pastel lesser black pastel. Then to get another gene with the homozygous pin more years of proving out From a pure business stand point I don't see it making sense to produce them. From a coolness factor however I would do it. Maybe I will.



Besides co-dom/inc dom I believe we are using the terms correctly.



If a single normal allele is stopping it from being lethal, that makes it inc dom (or what we call co-dom in the bp world) That fits exactly with mendel's definition, the phenotype is not fully expressed. While genetics may not be as simple as A+B=C, It's the best we can do right now and the statistics seems to follow. We still have a few weird unknowns, banana's sex linkish thing and the whiteout gene are two that come to mind. I do understand what your saying though, mendels system was pretty much made obsolete with new technology. Nothing is recessive anymore by his definition since everything is observable now with DNA analysis. But we don't have anyone working on the ball python genome that I know of, so we stick with old fashon mendel lol.



Guess you missed when I said the congo is another dominant gene according to vin russo, there are also many suspect ones, but again proving them out takes years and usually not worth the effort. Your statement would be more correct saying "all heterozygous morphs will have a statistical probability for 50% of their offspring to exhibit that heterozygous gene trait" because that how it works. Dominant co-dom are just classifications of the phenotypes in het and homo form. het and homo are where the statistics come from.


I feel as I need to repost this.
I did miss that. By exhibit I meant show visually and I was just trying to stay on codom/indom and dominant as to not add more confusion.